Old-Gen Ram 1500 Will Sport Classic Badging

2019 Ram 1500 Classic[4]A II

Ram did a smart thing when prepping for its fifth-generation Ram 1500 to enter the hot half-ton U.S. marketplace. Not only did it create its most advanced and lightest half-ton pickup truck for the 2019 model year, but it also upgraded a new Michigan plant location, all but eliminating that pesky production downtime when switching over to a new and improved model.

Building two versions of the same truck (the older DS model in Warren as well as in Saltillo, Mexico, the newer DT model in Sterling Heights) allows Ram not only to better target trim packages to the needs of the local dealer body whose communities may want more of one than the other, but also to offer a wider price structure for consumers who may or may not want a new pickup with all the newest bells and whistles.

Additionally, for the 2019 model year, Ram will offer a completely new badging strategy between the two trucks. One will offer the old-school crosshaired grille and a new "Classic" badge, while the other will move to the multi-slat, twin-nostril grille and a new Ram-stamped nameplate.

2019 Ram 1500 Classic badge[4] II

The 2019 Ram 1500 Classic will be offered in all three cab configurations (regular, Quad and crew) with three bed lengths (8-foot, 6-foot-4 and 5-foot-7), and three different engine options (3.6-liter V-6, 5.7-liter V-8 and late availability of the 3.0-liter EcoDiesel V-6). The value-priced Ram 1500 Classics will be offered in four different lower trim levels (Tradesman, Express, Big Horn/Lone Star and SSV law enforcement models). The Classic will also now have three different appearance packages called Chrome Plus, Tradesman SXT and the Express Black Accent Package. Each old-style Ram 1500 will offer unique badging, as well.

The 2019 Ram 1500 Classic will be available closer to the end of the year, with exact pricing for each of the four trims and configurations closer to their on-sale date. Ram 1500 Classics will be the only Ram half tons to offer a regular-cab pickup at least until the end of the 2019 model-year run.

Manufacturer images

 

2019 Ram 1500 Classic[8] B II

 

Comments

Chris, where are you at you DOLT??!! You are late and are supposed to be home now to take me for my hemorrhoid surgery!! smfh!!!

-papajim

I am not a fan of the ecoboosts, not after owning one. Nice when it works right, but that wasn't often. I'm not impressed with the 2019 Ram powertrain. It's a pretty old engine. The strongest attributes of the new Ram are things that don't make a truck a good truck.

@andrkwen

Gotcha u got half ton. And yes, its always great to get on those 6.2's to get them up and breathing better.

Curiosity, what do u get for FE. My neighbor next door up at my cabin has a 10 denali with 6.2L and he can't get any better than 13 whether driving it hard or babying it.

He just found a 2009 GMC sierra HD that has 2900 original miles in it. An older gentleman had it to pull camper, got very I'll and it sat in his garage for last 8/years. He is driving that more now than his 2010.

@gmsrgreat. The presentation is a hight graphic intensive pdf file. You can read it here if you have access. http://www.autonews.com/article/20180601/BLOG06/180539956/fca-5-year-plan-ram-pickup-jeep-marchionne

He just found a 2009 GMC sierra HD that has 2900 original miles in it. An older gentleman had it to pull camper, got very I'll and it sat in his garage for last 8/years. He is driving that more now than his 2010.


Posted by: TNTGMC | Jun 27, 2018 12:44:54 PM

if he's planning on buying it i would be a little skeptical on how long it's been sitting around JMHO

@John
The 4.6 used in Crown Vic’s have regularly gone over 300k miles.
Most of the time, it’s a severe duty cycle (police) or cabs. The 4.6 was a pretty durable motor.


@John
The 4.6 used in Crown Vic’s have regularly gone over 300k miles.
Most of the time, it’s a severe duty cycle (police) or cabs. The 4.6 was a pretty durable motor.

Posted by: Grnzel | Jun 27, 2018 12:59:05 PM

Wish my Super Duty would have had the 4.6!! The V10 and 5.4 sux!!

@ DLE

He already bought it. I looked it over 2 weekends ago up at lake. Wasnt up this past weekend. Its mint and he says runs amazing. Its an SLE model so it has cloth seats and the Duramax motor.

Wish my Super Duty would have had the 4.6...Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2018

@Frank

The 2-valve 4.6 they used in the Crown Vic would hardly pull the hat off your head. Why not just put an old VW Beetle motor in it?

That 4.6L would run all day, none ever said that for a GM engine, most taxi don't run GM cars for a reason.

Next.

That 4.6L would run all day, none ever said that for a GM engine, most taxi don't run GM cars for a reason.

Next.

Kind of goes against your statement that Ford is giving trucks away. Let me also educate you that the Raptor average transaction price is $71k and the Super Duty leads at $56k.

-Smokin’ a 6.2

The ATP of $43k for the F-150 isn't very impressive when you consider that a 2018 F-150 Lariat 4x4 3.5 EB is easily over $50k sticker and its just a mid-level trim. A Limited trim can hit $70k. The Raptor starts at $52k for a stripped down featureless truck and hits $60k with just a couple options.

If Ford is actually moving Limiteds, Platinum's, King Ranches, and Raptors anywhere close to sticker price, an average ATP of $43k is a disappointment. $43k suggests that Ford has had to offer large incentives to win sales in their desperation to maintain their market position as the "best selling brand of truck".

Up until the last few months, the F-150 was the newest half-ton on the market, the engines are the newest in any half-ton, and the body is made of "game changing" "military grade" alloys. The aluminum body and Ecoboost engines were supposed to take the F-150 to a whole 'nother level in ATP's. So far the change in ATP isn't all that impressive.

@ DLE

He already bought it. I looked it over 2 weekends ago up at lake. Wasnt up this past weekend. Its mint and he says runs amazing. Its an SLE model so it has cloth seats and the Duramax motor.


Posted by: TNTGMC | Jun 27, 2018 1:35:44 PM

ok sounds like he good a good deal,

@ Frank


I'll take a 5.7L, 5.3L, 6.0L, 6.2L and the bullet proof 4.3L are all better motors than your 4.6L!!///why do u think they also put these motors in boats, bc they can take a beating!!!!
BTW...no ford motors aren't in any boats since 1989 bc they didn't last....lmfao!!!

I do agree that average transaction price does not always translate into more profit but with GM’s spiffs averaging over $5000 per unit sold and Fords at around $4100 does show GM is putting more money on the hoods overall than Ford.
Posted by: Smokin’ a 6.2 | Jun 27, 2018 11:41:05 AM

The GM trucks are built on an updated version of the GMT900 platform from 2007 and offers limited configurations with only 3 engine options. The F-150 is riding on a totally new 2015 platform made of aluminum and sporting 5 different engines and now offers a 10-speed standard. Ford having to put as much money on the hood as they are, is NOT great.

----------------------

That 4.6L would run all day, none ever said that for a GM engine, most taxi don't run GM cars for a reason.

Next.
Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2018 1:55:57 PM

For an engine that makes less power than most V6 engines made in the last 20 years, the sad excuse that they might run for a long time is a weak one. The 2-valve V8's Ford built were 100% pointless. All the added complexity of an OHC engine with none of the benefits that OHC engines offer, namely better flowing 4-valve heads, independent intake and exhaust cams, etc. Plus the 4.6 has its fair share of issues. NYC taxi's used Crown Vics because they were cheap to buy, they were BOF cars that could take a pounding, and they were already easily upfitted for taxi duty. It was certainly not because NYC taxi operators like the 4.6 in it. The 4.6 has plenty of ways to destroy itself. The cracking intake manifolds killed many 4.6's since they would crack out of nowhere and cause them to overheat in no time at all. Timing chain guides would break apart and start rubbing metal on metal, which would fill the oil pan with shards of plastic and metal filings that would get sucked into the oil pickup. The metal would destroy the engine and the plastic would clog up the screen on the pickup. Oil pump failures were common. Valve guide wear and valve seat problems are common at higher mileage. Headgasket leaks happened from time to time. There are a few others. Most operators have seen enough failures to identify the common issues and get ahead of them. The PITA with the 4.6 was that in famous Ford fashion, the Romeo and Windsor engines are both 4.6 2-valve engines but most parts are not interchangeable, so you need to make sure the parts are for a Romeo or Windsor V8, you need to check which year because little changes were made every couple years. It's what drove me crazy about working on old Ford cars. You practically needed to know the myear and week the engine was built and at which plant it was built in order to find a part that would fit. Some of GM's old gen I small-block V8's had downsides but at least you could take a part from one year and put it on an engine made a year later and know it's going to fit.

That 4.6L would run all day, none ever said that for a GM engine, ...

Next.

Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2018 1:55:57 PM

The Chevy 5.3 could run 24-7, year end, year out. Can't say that about any Ford.

Cool Story Vincent, you can cherry pick data all night, I couldn't care buddy.

Have a nice life.

I think Vincent took Frank to school and he has nothing to come back with! OUCH!!!

@TNTRVLLIN'

There's a big difference between facts and opinions, he had neither.

He was just trvlling,

Don't you have some crying to do so, see ya.

It's what drove me crazy about working on old Ford cars.

Posted by: Vincent | Jun 27, 2018 3:14:48 PM


Sounds like you're just lazy, Period. If you say GM engine are easy to work on, you're just lazy.

At least Ford had the GUTS to try some new Tech, and look how dominant their motors are now, half the size of anything GM and blowing their doors off.

That's pathetic, keep your 6.2L V8, it don't matter to me when a 2.7L can beat it.

It's what drove me crazy about working on old Ford cars. You practically needed to know the myear and week the engine was built and at which plant it was built in order to find a part that would fit.
Posted by: Vincent | Jun 27, 2018 3:14:48 PM

Yeah my cousin and I ran into that working on his Foxbody. He was rebuilding a 302 for it and needed a new water pump. It took FOREVER to find a junkyard with a water pump that had the correct flow direction, was a 'short' pump, designed to fit his engine's timing chain cover, had the right bolt pattern, had the right bosses, etc. I never understood why they built engines at two different plants and allowed them to make changes that made one engine into two completely different non-interchangeable versions. I like the old SBF's, they're fun to build... when you have all the right parts.

At least Ford had the GUTS to try some new Tech, and look how dominant their motors are now, half the size of anything GM and blowing their doors off.
That's pathetic, keep your 6.2L V8, it don't matter to me when a 2.7L can beat it.

Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2018 4:30:13 PM

Frank, do you even think...… Where is the new tech? Placing a turbo on an engine isn't new tech. Enabling a powerful V8 to obtain 4 cylinder engine fuel efficiency is tech.

@Brick

You think the Windsor 302 V8 was bad?

Go to a NAPA parts counter. Ask for a water pump for a 4.0 Cologne Ford V6

You will see a grown man cry.

Frank, do you even think...… Where is the new tech? Placing a turbo on an engine isn't new tech. Enabling a powerful V8 to obtain 4 cylinder engine fuel efficiency is tech.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jun 27, 2018 5:35:27 PM

Ford makes way more power using have the cubes that of a GM engine.

That to me, is FAR MORE ADVANCE.

You will see a grown man cry.


Posted by: papajim | Jun 27, 2018 5:48:40 PM

That's if you're a lazy mechanic and can not find the proper parts for your engine, and a papajim, yeah you would cry, no surprise there.

Cooling system parts for the 4.0 are a mess.

The parts catalog for the 4.0 changed almost every year. It was built as both a pushrod engine and a SOHC engine. A nightmare for counter personnel.

@ Frank

Again slamming 2/turbos onto an engine isnt advancement! Bring your 2.7L on. Stock for stock, it will never beat a 6.2L. Get educated my friend.

@gmsrgreat. The presentation is a hight graphic intensive pdf file. You can read it here if you have access. http://www.autonews.com/article/20180601/BLOG06/180539956/fca-5-year-plan-ram-pickup-jeep-marchionne


Posted by: Smokin’ a 6.2 | Jun 27, 2018 12:48:31 PM

Thanks for posting. I enjoyed the read. I hope RAM is successful.

I ain’t taking Turbo, talking small OHC engine, your precious LS engine is a reborn 302/351, check out the firing order for starters, damn pansy

They are a good looking car. To bad that good looks are wrapping a p.o.s.

@Frank

Spare yourself the embarrassment. Don't discuss engine technology without getting some backup.

You just ain't got the chops for that discussion without some help.

Ha! I’ve torn down engine, so I’ll keep my knowledge.

That guy is in denial

Frank, anybody can tear down a motor.

Putting it back together so that it runs right is the trick.

Just ask for help anytime. I'll try to answer your questions.

It’s a terminology us younger folks call it, sorry it’s not a throw back word for you, I ain’t got time for laymans.

Have a good one.

Curiosity, what do u get for FE. My neighbor next door up at my cabin has a 10 denali with 6.2L and he can't get any better than 13 whether driving it hard or babying it.


Posted by: TNTGMC | Jun 27, 2018 12:44:54 PM


My vehicle got just under 20 on a trip to Florida from Wisconsin and back, manually calculated, around 100k. At 175k for the same trip it averaged just under 19 round trip.

Everyday driving the display does show an average of around 14, but I do drive it like I stole it,

It actually gets the same mileage as my 01 yukon 5.3 rated at 285 hp with the 4 speed. Just under 120hp improvement in a heavier truck.

I’d call that progress...

The 2-valve 4.6 they used in the Crown Vic would hardly pull the hat off your head. Why not just put an old VW Beetle motor in it?


Posted by: papajim | Jun 27, 2018 1:37:18 PM

Amen.

To this day, a 97 ford F-150 with a 4.6 may have been the most gutless truck I ever drove.

Quite the badge of honor for that motor considering I did own a ‘85 chev with the 6 and a stick, no granny. Had it for two weeks with intent to kill it. Ended up selling it for $100 due to failure to destroy.

That chevy was still faster, lol

It’s a terminology us younger folks call it, sorry it’s not a throw back word for you, I ain’t got time for laymans.

Have a good one.


Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2018 8:35:41 PM

Frank,

I know I’ve said this before but just in case you missed it,

Your playing checkers while everyone else is playing chess.

Your lack of knowledge is apparent, just stop. Or at least show the courtesy to ask people on here that do know to help you understand. There are some guys on here who have obvious real world knowledge.

You are not making that impression

actually gets the same mileage as my 01 yukon 5.3 rated at 285 hp with the 4 speed. Just under 120hp improvement in a heavier truck.

I’d call that progress...

@ andrwken

Thats pretty dang good process, especially when its got high mileage on that. All the more reason why a drive GM

As for Frank, like many have said, u can tear down an engine all u want. Heck, u can tear down anything, its the precision to put it back together and make it work again that's the hard part.

Cooling system parts for the 4.0 are a mess.

The parts catalog for the 4.0 changed almost every year. It was built as both a pushrod engine and a SOHC engine. A nightmare for counter personnel.
Posted by: papajim | Jun 27, 2018 6:31:18 PM


Haha yeah I've heard that more than once! My nephew had a 95 or 96 Ranger (southern truck) and he wanted to use it to learn how to work on engines and eventually build it into an off-roading/hunting truck with big tires. He and his dad spent weeks searching salvage yards for parts that would fit. They were ready to pull their hair out for a while there. I think they eventually let the parts clerk find a few of the things they needed. I seem to remember them saying that the engine changed every 2 or 3 years, and you couldn't rely on model year because an 95 Explorer might not use the same version of the 4.0 as a 95 Ranger (I think).

As for Frank, like many have said, u can tear down an engine all u want. Heck, u can tear down anything, its the precision to put it back together and make it work again that's the hard part.


Posted by: TNTGMC | Jun 27, 2018 10:14:39 PM

yeah like you would know how to tear down an engine and put it back together correctly, all your opinions are bias and don't hold any water you're just another brand humper on PUTC, just like eco-boost rules

Fake TNTGMC

Says the spineless person who is always using others names! Get a clue.

BTW... I think u should look over your friend Franks posts! He is the biased one who always gets facts shoved into his face and can't take it, so he tucks and runs!

Have a great day!

Oh and here is another fact not biased. Please know the difference

https://youtu.be/8KN5juXz8CE

So Frank and your Ford boys get get even more upset!

@ FAKE TNTGMC

that's nothing here's what a truck pulls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la69eqoaGGQ

from the real TNTGMC

LMFAO... Fake TNTGMC

Get your facts straight.... Again keep posting, I don't mind the attention. We all know who is fake, bc I had this username first...you'll always be second just like you're always are behind my 6.2L...

https://tenor.com/MWCR.gif

Ohhhhh Frank....

You still have not come back by to pick up Chris's Barbie Happy Meal yet? Are you still recovering from your hemorrhoid surgery that someone else mentioned yesterday? Maybe that's why you haven't been by to get the Happy Meal?!

.you'll always be second just like you're always are behind my 6.2L...

https://tenor.com/MWCR.gif


Posted by: TNTGMC | Jun 28, 2018 10:06:40 AM

let me know when you're fake@$$ splineless 6.2 pulls a real load a man's load!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


let me know when you're fake@$$ splineless 6.2 pulls a real load a man's load!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Ford Rules GM Drools | Jun 28, 2018 11:13:37 AM

You're mistaken. All a Ford can do is swallow a heavy load. It sure can't haul a good payload.

@ ford rules

Ouch did a touch a nerve???

I'll take my 6.2L in my half ton over Any ecobust ford offers. Plus, the V8 is more reliable!

If we did a pole. I bet more would agree with me than u sir!!

And who u calling spineless?? I'm not the one using others names..or maybe, just maybe, YOU are the person who's been using my name??

LOL...I finally got you out of hiding!! Spineless and GUTLESS shows his try self....so proud of you

@ TNTGMC The poll has been done Ford sells more Ecoboosts in trucks then GM sells V8s.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2017 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us